That means he’s now deploying his anti-science, climate denialist PR spin for the largest privately-held coal producer in the U.S., Ohio-based Murray Energy Corp.

Milloy apparently hasn’t bothered to update his online biography with this new title, and he didn’t respond to questions from DeSmogBlog about his exact start date. But it appears that he took the job with the coal company led by controversial conservative coal baron Robert Murray at some point last year. *Update: A Murray Energy spokesperson confirmed with DeSmog that Milloy began employment at the company on October 15, 2013.*

Milloy appears on the roster of attendees at a White House meeting last Halloween, according to an Office of Management and Budget meeting log from Oct. 31, 2013. Milloy, appearing on behalf of Murray Energy Corp, was part of the coal industry coalition pushing back against efforts to improve mine safety rules protecting workers from respirable coal dust that can cause black lung disease, according to documents supplied at the meeting.

Last September, Milloy wrote about Murray Energy briefly on his JunkScience.com blog without mentioning any ties to the company. Perhaps he hadn’t joined Murray yet, or didn’t see reason to declare his position? (*See update above*)

The CPAC global warming panel taking place today in Washington features a cast of climate confusionists apparently seeking to permanently sink the GOP’s reputation on scientific matters.

With one exception — CEO of Abundant Power Group, Shannon Smith, a conservative who acknowledged in a recent tweet that “climate change is a reality” — the rest of the panel is stacked with a denier dream team of veteran apologists for tobacco companies, the Koch brothers, the chemical industry and dirty energy interests.

Prince Charles is a “global warming Nazi” and, apparently, so is U.S. President Barack Obama.

That’s according to Dr. Roy Spencer, one of the world’s most often cited deniers of the risks of human-caused climate change.

In a blog post titled “Time to push back against the global warming Nazis,” Dr Spencer of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, wrote that he had made a decision about anyone who used the term “denier” to describe … well… deniers of the threats of human-caused climate change.

He’s going to call them “Global warming Nazis.”

Spencer wrote:

When politicians and scientists started calling people like me “deniers”, they crossed the line. They are still doing it.

They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics’ view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi’s extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.

Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.

Have you ever found yourself reading a news article or op-ed in which an “expert” from a distinguished-sounding “think tank” or “institute” seeks to distort or attack climate change science or, alternately, decries public investment in clean energy solutions, and wonder in whose interest this individual and their organization is operating?

Who is funding the proliferation of the anti-renewables, pro-status-quo perspective in all these mainstream media outlets? And why is the media providing them a platform at all, let alone without disclosing the fossil fuel funding behind their misinformation efforts?

The Checks and Balances report, Fossil Fuel Front Groups on the Front Page, concludes that 58 of the largest mainstream newspapers and publications have quoted or given op-ed space to a fossil-fuel-funded “expert” every other day for the past five years, on average.

“Despite having received millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests, such as ExxonMobil and Koch Industries, these groups’ financial ties to the fossil fuel industry are rarely mentioned,” according to the report.

Checks and Balances writes that it “uncovered the extent of this deception by focusing on the 10 most prominent fossil fuel front groups’ traction [in] 58 of the largest daily newspapers, the Associated Press and Politico. This analysis does not include mentions in broadcast, radio or online publications for these 10 advocacy groups. As a result, this report only scratches the surface on these fossil fuel-funded groups’ influence on the energy debate.”

The report has received a chilly response from some of the very “experts” often quoted without any disclosure of their fossil fuel funding. Steven “Junk Man” Milloy was so peeved that he tapped out a quick post attacking the messenger, a typical tactic of the fossil-fuel-funded echo chamber.

Milloy knows the tobacco playbook well. As Connor Gibson points out over at PolluterWatch, “Steve Milloy has been a central climate denier, who was paid to shill for tobacco company Phillip Morris and oil giant Exxon before work for the Cato Institute and starting the climate denial website “JunkScience.”

Oh, the irony. A guy who built his career – and fortune – by muddying the science on the health effects of smoking is now accusing the E.P.A. of harming lungs and causing heart problems.

Steve Milloy, the former Big Tobacco flack who now runs the trashy haven for climate denial JunkScience.com, is waging a veritable war on the E.P.A. for their research on the effects of smog (or soot, or fine particulates, or PM 2.5 if you want to get really technical) on the cardiovascular and respiratory systems.

To hear Milloy describe it – on JunkScience or his newly launched website, EPAHumanTesting.com – the E.P.A. is running “illegal” and “unethical” experiments on human subjects. He’s got allies in this fight, most notably the American Tradition Institute (ATI), a think tank that purports itself as “restoring science, accountability, and liberty to the environmental policy debate.” Milloy is also a fellow at the ATI. On September 24, ATI sued the E.P.A. for “inhumane and illegal treatment of test subjects.”

If you recognize ATI and its lead attorney David Schnare, it might well be from some recent coverage of their role in the pestering of climate scientist Michael Mann. Last month, ATI and Schnare lost a legal battle to expose the Mann’s private emails, a feckless attempt at rehashing the Climategate nonstory, which Kate Sheppard reported on, and which Greg Laden expanded upon.

As Milloy frames this research – E.P.A. tests unwilling humans! – it’s perfect bait for radical conservative media outlets who will jump on any opportunity to bash the E.P.A.

What none of these articles will tell you, and what you can’t find on either Milloy’s or the ATI’s sites, are any of the following realties:

You have to wonder what happened to Tom Borelli. Here’s a guy who studied at the New York Medical College - who was smart enough and hard-working enough to get a PHD in biochemistry - and now he spends his time trying to hasten … not really the end of the world, but an end to human habitability.

Of course, poisoning humans, rather than saving them, appears to have been Borelli’s life work. He was a Philip Morris operative in the ’90s, proudly fighting for the rights of tobacco fans to blow smoke in the face of passing children - passing anybody, really. Now, as sometimes-DeSmogBlog contributor Kate Sheppard documents here, Borelli is gathering up oil money to finance an attack on any corporation that promotes responsible action on climate change.

Tom, we really hope you have a nice house. Because, according to Dante at least, in your next life, you will get a rather less fabulous choice of neighborhoods: either the Eighth and Ninth circle of hell (Fraud or Treachery).

Barnes claims that Penn State’s decision to exonerate Mann generated “a storm of controversy” and “came under severe attack.” Reading his inflammatory language, you might think that a whole lot of academics and scientists ridiculed the inquiry. Who is this angry mob that generated such a “storm of controversy?”

Actually, the Barnes storm is comprised of only three people - a mining executive, the wealthiest member of Congress, and a former FoxNews.com columnist.

In the days and weeks following the theft of climate scientists’ emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in November, climate change skeptics and deniers flooded the blogosphere and mainstream press with reactions suggesting that the ‘scandal’ had proven global warming was a myth.

In many instances, the reactions sounded like a choreographed choir singing from the same sheet of talking points, or at least the same sheet of of well-worn memes and cliches, like ‘smoking gun’ and ‘final nail in the coffin.’

The Desmog team took a look at several unique phrases that flew around the denier echo chamber in the aftermath of the CRU email hack, and how those memes were often adopted by the mainstream media as a result. Here is a sampling of what we identified:

” … that’s all he is and all he can be.”

The amazing thing about Esquire’s brilliantly written new profile on Marc Morano is that Morano himself probably loves it.

Per the quote above, Esquire writer John Richardson calls Morano a “turd in the punch bowl.” He calls him a liar, referring to “the method Morano loves best, using the laugh value of satire to displace the truth requirements of journalism.”

Yet Esquire still gives Morano 6,500 words of love and attention (the two are one and the same in Morano’s denier circles). The magazine even introduces him in the subhed as the guy who “broke the Swift Boat story and effectively stalled John Kerry’s presidential run.” (C’mon, you guys. He didn’t “break” it. He made it up.)

"Fossil-fuel companies have spent millions funding anti-global-warming think tanks, purposely creating a climate of doubt around the science. DeSmogBlog is the antidote to that obfuscation." ~ BRYAN WALSH, TIME MAGAZINE